Beatty’s career is a celebrated and complex one, so I’m
doing something different in this Directors post. Beatty has directed five
feature films, but he’s been responsible for the creation of many more. As a
producer, Beatty was able to throw his clout around and help make some of the
finest American films of all time. He starred in most of the films he produced,
and co-wrote a few as well. He was responsible for securing the directors and
casts of those projects, and earned final cut on many of them. In short,
because Beatty’s influence on the film’s he produced is paramount, I’ve listed
them here as well.
as Director
So you’re dead. You had your whole life ahead of you – a
young, professional athlete with a healthy heart and a bright mind – but now
you’re gone. Problem is, an angel (Buck Henry, who co-directed the film)
plucked you from life prematurely. Given this fatal error, Joe Pendleton
(Beatty) is now entitled to a new body on Earth. He eventually settles on the figure
of millionaire Leo Farnsworth, who was recently poisoned to death by his wife
and his wife’s lover.
Heaven Can Wait
has a lot packed into its 101 minutes, and it’s a credit to everyone involved
(many of whom were nominated for Oscars), that every subplot is engaging and
necessary. Beatty’s performance in the film is pleasantly manic. Joe is a young
buck who is kind and bursting with energy, which creates a performance that is
warm and alive. The scene where Joe (as Farnsworth) invites members of the
press and public to sit in on a board meeting remains one of the great Warren
Beatty acting moments. As Joe tosses millions of dollars around in an effort to
make Farnsworth’s company a respected one, Beatty fires off his lines with
gusto. The scene encapsulates the heart of Joe, and the core sentiment of the
entire film. None of us know how long we’re around for, so while we’re here,
let’s do our best to make some good of it. A-
On paper, Reds is
a standard “homework” movie. The film is a 195 minute-long period drama about
young, American journalist, Jack Reed, who becomes enamored with Communist ideals.
It’s one of those classic films you keep hearing you should see, but
conveniently never make time for. I’ve made time for it twice: once in college,
and again for this post, and both instances were beneficial. While perhaps
arduous to undertake, once Reds gets
going, it breezes by.
The cast is stacked (Diane Keaton as Reed’s longtime lover,
Jack Nicholson as the man who comes between them, Maureen Stapleton in an
Oscar-winning turn as Emma Goldman), the look is beautiful (cinematographer Vittorio
Storaro won an Oscar for his work), and the scope is massive. Detractors say
Beatty won the Best Director Oscar as a consolation prize for his influence on
the film industry as well as the hard work he put into Reds. I disagree. Reds is
a grand film and deserved a grand reception. Then and now, the film is worthy
of attention. A-
Dick Tracy was one
of my favorite films as a kid. Drowning in lush primary colors, the sets were
big, the costumes were bold, and the cinematography was gorgeous. It was so
much fun to watch all the big names (Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Paul Sorvino,
etc.) ham it up while caked in comic book make-up. Thankfully, it’s one of
those childhood favorites that still holds up. Watching Dick Tracy for this post, I felt like a joyful kid again, smiling
at Tracy’s wisecracks, marveling at the massive matte backdrops. I was also
reminded how much of a novelty big studio comic book film adaptations used to
be. They were events; maybe one released per year, each actively trying to
distinguish themselves from others in the genre. I’ll never tire of revisiting
this film; it remains a wholly unique take on a genre that has been saturated
to the point of indifference. A-
The biggest compliment you can issue a political satire is
that, once a few years have passed since its release, the irony becomes
reality. Bulworth is about a
politician who has a breakdown and begins doing crazy things in public because
he no longer gives a shit. The crazier his antics, the higher his popularity
surges. Sound familiar?
Senator Jay Billington Bulworth has nothing politically in
common with our President-elect, but the song remains the same: do and say
crazy stuff, and the press will fuel it while (some) members of the populace
will award it. I’ve always enjoyed Bulworth
– it’s hilarious, looks great, and the soundtrack still hits (everyone had this album back in the day)
– but it’s better now. Having rewatched it post-2016 election, I value the film
much more, not only for what it’s saying, but how it says it. I didn’t remember
cinematographer Vittorio Storaro’s use of stark colors in the film. Nor did I
recall Don Cheadle’s incendiary work as an L.A. gangbanger (he was still in
Mouse/Devil in a Blue Dress mode). Moreover,
I never fully “got” what Beatty was doing with Bulworth until now. Shame it had to come to this for me to realize
it. B+
Beatty has been trying to make his Howard Hughes movie since
the ‘70s, and now that it’s finally here, Rules
Don’t Apply has revealed itself as a forgetful romance film featuring Howard Hughes, when the
character should surely be the highlight. Beatty is older now, and it may seem
vaguely ludicrous to cast him as Hughes for the duration of the billionaire’s
life, but Rules Don’t Apply would be
a much better film if it had more of Beatty’s Hughes. Many of the macro events
depicted in Rules Don’t Apply were
also portrayed in Martin Scorsese’s The
Aviator (namely the flying of The Hercules). Hughes was 42 when he flew The
Hercules, DiCaprio was 30 when The
Aviator was released, Beatty is 79. And honestly, it doesn’t really matter.
Beatty is so goddamn good in the role, he’s able to transcend the continuity of
age (it helps that make-up makes Beatty look considerably younger).
It feels like Beatty was too afraid to make Hughes the center
of the film, and Rules Don’t Apply
suffers for it. Lily Collins (who plays a county-girl trying to make it big in
La La Land) and Alden Ehrenreich (who plays a Hughes-employed chauffeur hired
to drive Collins’ character around) are both fine actors, but their central
romance in the film is vanilla at best. Rules
Don’t Apply is competently made, looks great, and features a killer
supporting cast. But the fact is, the movie is only really alive when Beatty is
on screen, which isn’t nearly often enough. B-
as Producer
What’s New Pussycat
(1965)
Beatty’s biggest contribution to the romp comedy What’s New Pussycat was that he got
Woody Allen his first screenwriting and film acting credit. But shortly after
Beatty put the film in motion, he threw a series of fits and left the project.
Peter O’Toole took over Beatty’s acting role, and Beatty is now listed as an
uncredited producer on the film. The movie itself, about a sex addict trying to
stay faithful, is ‘60s fun, but I can’t help wonder how it would’ve turned out
with Beatty at the helm. B-
Bonnie and Clyde
(1967)
The funny thing about game changers is that you can’t talk
about them without discussing their influence. If I judge Bonnie and Clyde based solely on the merits of filmmaking, then I
can easily hail it as a great film. It’s fun, it’s fast, it’s brutal. The
acting is superb and the French New Wave-inspired pace is refreshing. But
perhaps the most interesting thing about Bonnie
and Clyde is what it did. And what it did
was change American filmmaking. Movie critics got fired after panning it, while
others became stars for hailing it. Violence and sexuality were never depicted the
same in film. And, most significantly, Bonnie
and Clyde helped pave the way for the audacious American filmmaking that
dominated the ‘70s.
Beatty had the pull to handpick the director himself, and he
went through a host of candidates before going with Arthur Penn. Casting Bonnie
was another long task, with seemingly every actress in town vying for the part.
In short, Bonnie and Clyde is a
confluence of talents who came together and excelled beyond what anyone
could’ve imaged. A+
Shampoo (1975)
Shampoo is fun,
dangerous, classic American ‘70s cinema. The movie takes place in the 36 some
odd hours directly before, during, and after Nixon’s 1968 Presidential win, and
there isn’t a single scene that needs to be added or cut. Shampoo is a perfect assembly of 109 minutes of film. It knows when
to be hilariously faced paced (Beatty leaving a party, then coming back, then
leaving), and when to slow down (Beatty telling Jack Warden what women talk
about). Shampoo could be Hal Ashby’s
best film (that’s a tough call), but it certainly contains my favorite Warren
Beatty performance. His George is so blasé, so lackadaisical – he’s so… L.A. He never raises his voice above
speaking level and always manages to keep cool, even when he’s not. There’s a
certain fuckitall attitude George
mixes with his frenzy that I’m so drawn to. Shampoo
came out in one of the best years ever for film, and was slightly overlooked
because of it. I’m thrilled time has lent itself well to this one. An American
classic. A+
Ishtar (1987)
I hadn’t seen Ishtar
before this post, but I was certainly aware of its infamy. A notorious flop, one of the
worst films ever made, a career-ender for many involved, and on and on.
Having finally watched it, such negative hyperbole is nonsense. Ishtar was judged unfairly due to how it
was made – inflated budgets, behind-the-scenes tension, studio interference. A film
should be based on the quality of the film itself, not on the rumored antics
that occurred to get it made. This still happens today. Seemingly every review
of Nate Parker’s The Birth of Nation
mentioned Parker’s exonerated rape charge from 1999, while reviews of Zach
Braff’s Wish I Was Here were
dominated by that film’s controversial Kickstarter campaign. These are
instances where film criticism fails. Dig into anyone’s past or dive deep into most
any production, and you’re bound to find something you don’t personally agree
with.
Ishtar is a funny
film, and I enjoyed a lot of it. Admittedly, I went in with negative
preconceived notions, but even before the opening credits were finished (“When
you’re hot, you’re hot.”), I knew I was in for a good time. The movie is about
two awful lounge singers (a headstrong Dustin Hoffman, a dimwitted Warren
Beatty) who book a gig in Morocco but quickly get mistaken as CIA spooks. The
plot is thin (not unusual for out-and-out romps) but the slapstick physical
humor and verbal sarcasm was more than enough to keep me entertained. Every
film deserves a fair shot, especially if you are paid to review them. C+
The Pick-up Artist
(1987)
Writer/director James Toback is best when he’s breaking the
rules. There was a certain defiance to his first film projects, including The Gambler, Fingers, and Exposed,
that I loved. The Pick-up Artist, however,
is slight by design, to its own detriment. Toback wanted to make something
sillier than he had before, so he wrote a script about a notorious philanderer
who gets a taste of his own medicine, with Beatty in mind for the lead. Beatty
passed but stayed on as a producer, helping secure the likes of Dennis Hopper,
Danny Aiello and Harvey Keitel in supporting roles, while a fresh-faced Robert
Downey Jr. took the lead. I get what Toback and Beatty were going for with The Pick-up Artist, but the film is ultimately
a waste of the skills of everyone involved. D+
Bugsy (1991)
I can’t hate on The
Pick-Up Artist too much, because had Beatty and Toback not worked together
on that film, Beatty’s long gestating biopic about mobster Bugsy Siegel may
have never been made. Or certainly not made this well. Bugsy is a joyous gangster throwback flick. The movie lives and
breathes the Hollywood Golden Age – the big cars, the lavish get-ups, the
gangster wealth. Toback ached to direct the film, but Beatty wisely chose Barry
Levinson, a great director with polished skills. The result is one of the best
films all of the men have ever been involved with.
I’m also glad Beatty didn’t direct this himself, because it
gave him more time to focus on his performance. As Bugsy, Beatty does something
he hasn’t attempted before or since. The effortless Warren Beatty charm is
there, of course, but Beatty captures Siegel’s explosive anger shockingly well.
He plays the mobster as a fiery manic depressive, screaming his head off at a
guy in one room (“Did you think you could steal from ME?!”), then calmly
finishing his meal in the next room. There’s a chaotic energy Beatty brings to
Bugsy that helps makes the film such a success, and that’s just one reason Bugsy is worth watching. A
Love Affair
(1994)
Love Affair is a
healthy reminder that it is never wise to write films off. I assumed Love Affair was going to be schmaltzy
and melodramatic; a way for Beatty and his new wife, Annette Bening, to
cinematically express their newfound love. The film is about a famed former
athlete (known for his many female conquests), who meets the woman and finally decides to settle down. Because this plot
sounds eerily similar to Beatty and Bening’s real life courtship, I unfairly
dismissed Love Affair. I’m so happy I
watched it for this post, because while it may be a tad sentimental, it’s damn
well made and boasts a universally qualified cast. Beatty and Bening’s real
life chemistry transcends the screen effortlessly, but perhaps the main
incentive to watch the film is to witness Katharine Hepburn’s final film
performance. Playing Beatty’s aunt for one extended scene, Hepburn steals the
moment so profoundly; you simply can’t take your eyes off her. The woman
remained forever magnetic.
Love Affair was
made twice before, originally in 1939, and more popularly in 1957 as An Affair to Remember. Most viewers of
this Love Affair know how the film is
going to end, but Beatty and Bening have a ball getting us there. B
In Summation
Masterful
Bonnie and Clyde
(1967)
Shampoo (1975)
Great
Heaven Can Wait
(1978)
Reds (1981)
Dick Tracy (1990)
Bugsy (1991)
Bulworth (1998)
Good
What’s New Pussycat
(1965)
Ishtar (1987)
Love Affair (1994)
Rules Don’t Apply
(2016)
Eh
The Pick-up Artist
(1987)
Just Plain Bad
None
Always love reading these director posts. Get on Tarkovsky dammit! ;)
ReplyDeleteThanks Mark! Gahhh I know I know!
DeleteFrom the films he's directed so far from what I've seen, with the exception of bits of Heaven Can Wait. Here is how I would rank from what I've seen from him so far...
ReplyDelete1. Reds
2. Dick Tracy
3. Bulworth
Reds was something I think I finally saw last year and how the fuck did Chariots of Fire beat that film over Reds is just baffling. Reds is an achievement in film. Dick Tracy was a film I saw as a kid and thought it was cool. Especially for the cast as seeing Pacino, Hoffman, and Caan in all of that makeup with those gorgeous colors was fun and it had Madonna in one of her better performances. Bulworth I like a lot as it wasn't just funny but had a lot of truth about the bullshit that is politics. I hope to check out Rules Don't Apply soon on TV as I'm in no rush to see it.
For his work in producing, Bonnie & Clyde, Shampoo, and Bugsy are great while I did like the remake of Love Affair as he and Benning definitely had chemistry while seeing Katharine Hepburn in one of her final roles was a joy to watch. I've only seen bits of Ishtar but not enough of it to give it an opinion while I don't remember The Pick-Up Artist at all.
I'm glad Warren Beatty is back as reading his most recent interview shows someone who is just glad to be back and seem to be really humble these days from his time off and just wanting to be a dad and husband. I recently bought McCabe & Mrs. Miller last month as it's a B-Day present for me this Monday.
Chariots beating Reds is utterly baffling. Chariots winning anything at all has always surprised me. Maybe it was a more important film at the time, in the context of what was going on in the world. I dunno. But that movie has never done anything for me. And happy birthday man, hope you had a good one!
DeleteI have seen none of these, this is a bit embarrassing. lol
ReplyDeleteOhhhh you would LOVE Shampoo. Love love love.
DeleteBeen trying to get a hold of Shampoo for some time now. I adore Bulworth and Dick Tracy is a film I have lots of nostalgia for.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the films known as notorious flops- Heaven's Gate and in this case, Ishtar- are actually more interesting than many films of today. Insofar as the ideas and narrative ambition they have.
Dude, I love what you said in your last paragraph. That is so, so true. After the films get some distance, you realize the infamy surrounding them can be nonsense. Some films are just dogshit, of course. But I'd rather rewatch Ishtar twice than rewatch most of the new films I saw in 2016.
DeleteDo you ever plan on doing one of these for Charlie Kaufman?
ReplyDeleteHe would be good to cover, but I typically only cover directors in this series. Touching on Beatty's producing credits was a first. Still, Kaufman is an absolute genius.
DeleteStill, Kaufman is far more synonymous with many of his films than the directors are. When I think of Being John Malkovich or Eternal Sunshine, Charlie Kaufman is the first person I think of, not Spike Jonze or Michel Gondry.
DeleteAlso, you have covered a non-director before: David Mamet.
Oh I totally agree. What's your favorite Kaufman script/movie?
DeleteEasily Eternal Sunshine. It was the first Kaufman film I saw and his remained in my top 5 ever since. Synecdoche, NY is equally brilliant, but is undeniably a more difficult and less accessible film. It contains my favorite PSH performance, which is saying something, and is the only performance of this century that, at least in my opinion, is on par with DDL's work in TWBB. Kaufman's other work (w/ the exception of Human Nature and Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, which I haven't seen) are amazing films as well.
DeleteBeing John Malkovich is my favorite Kaufman script, but man, PSH's performance in Synecdoche is incredible. It's so interesting (and sad), but that performance fully clicked for me once Hoffman died. It's such a moving film.
DeleteThe only movie i have watched here is Dick Tracy as a child and i remember all the characters in it gave me nightmares. Especially Little Face. I will never forget him.
ReplyDeleteSo creepy! The make-up in that movie is so damn good.
Delete